Is 2021 Giannis vs peak KG a legit discussion?

[Ron Swanson]

Why the hell are we using Team D-RTG and comparing from 20 years ago? (1st ranked defense this season was the 107.1 Lakers, in 2003 it was 94.1...). But this was always the predictable blowback from people who still put Garnett on a pedestal. Everything clearly in Giannis' favor at this point of their respective careers (nearly every pace adjusted box and advanced metric, awards/accolades, overall team success) ultimately gets refuted by the only two prime-KG, holy grail metrics (RAPM, on/off) that matter in this debate. Never mind that simple logic dictates that the worse your bench and supporting counterparts are, the better your "impact" numbers will naturally reflect.

Someone nailed it earlier in this thread, but Minnesota KG is constantly viewed as one of the best defensive anchors post-Russell, despite there being only sparse, circumstantial evidence (literally only two Top-10 and zero Top-5 defenses in 12 seasons) entirely reliant on sometimes noisy, isolated on-off/RPM data. We then use Boston KG as a form of confirmation bias ("See, KG was always an ATG defensive anchor), but yet we overlook the incredibly good supporting pieces (Thibodeau, Rondo, Pierce, Posey, Perkins, etc.) that helped achieved those results and penalize Giannis for having too good of a supporting cast, despite the fact that Giannis has anchored defenses (2018-20) at a comparable rate (+7.4 and +5.2 better than league average) as KG did even on those stacked Boston teams (+8.5 and +6). I'll reiterate that I won't argue with anyone saying they give the small but clear edge defensively to KG, but sorry, the offensive gap at this point is too massive when their defense is at least an honest debate and comparable. People can talk about "recency bias" all they want, but history will eventually reach the consensus that this past 3-year stretch by Giannis is one of the most un-impeachable multi-year peaks a superstar has ever had, and guys like KG just don't belong in that tier.

[LukaTheGOAT]

Why the hell are we using Team D-RTG and comparing from 20 years ago? (1st ranked defense this season was the 107.1 Lakers, in 2003 it was 94.1...). But this was always the predictable blowback from people who still put Garnett on a pedestal. Everything clearly in Giannis' favor at this point of their respective careers (nearly every pace adjusted box and advanced metric, awards/accolades, overall team success) ultimately gets refuted by the only two prime-KG, holy grail metrics (RAPM, on/off) that matter in this debate. Never mind that simple logic dictates that the worse your bench and supporting counterparts are, the better your "impact" numbers will naturally reflect.

Someone nailed it earlier in this thread, but Minnesota KG is constantly viewed as one of the best defensive anchors post-Russell, despite there being only sparse, circumstantial evidence (literally only two Top-10 and zero Top-5 defenses in 12 seasons) entirely reliant on sometimes noisy, isolated on-off/RPM data. We then use Boston KG as a form of confirmation bias ("See, KG was always an ATG defensive anchor), but yet we overlook the incredibly good supporting pieces (Thibodeau, Rondo, Pierce, Posey, Perkins, etc.) that helped achieved those results and penalize Giannis for having too good of a supporting cast, despite the fact that Giannis has anchored defenses (2018-20) at a comparable rate (+7.4 and +5.2 better than league average) as KG did even on those stacked Boston teams (+8.5 and +6). I'll reiterate that I won't argue with anyone saying they give the small but clear edge defensively to KG, but sorry, the offensive gap at this point is too massive when their defense is at least an honest debate and comparable. People can talk about "recency bias" all they want, but history will eventually reach the consensus that this past 3-year stretch by Giannis is one of the most un-impeachable multi-year peaks a superstar has ever had, and guys like KG just don't belong in that tier.

I'm not disagreeing with your post, but I do wonder if this 3 year stretch will be questioned by more skeptical minds. I would like to think we haven't seen the best of Giannis and that his performance in the Finals are things to come in terms of a truly great 3 year stretch.

However, I found this stat, and assuming the man calculated it correctly, I think it is worth sharing. I think it is a point that might be used to question the resilience of Giannis' offense just a bit. And like a post I made earlier on, there is reason to believe there is a gap between KG and Giannis on D based off the advanced numbers we have. We know Giannis is notably better on offense but does the gap close I'd we are talking about overall resiliency against top defenses?

Read on Twitter

?s=19

[sansterre]

Read on Twitter

?s=19

But let's not get it twisted: he's underperfoming from a regular season MVP level. Which still makes him really, really good.

[LukaTheGOAT]

Read on Twitter

?s=19

But let's not get it twisted: he's underperfoming from a regular season MVP level. Which still makes him really, really good.

Right, I'm not disagreeing. I am just trying to add some color to the discussion here. I think quantifying the gap between Giannis and KG offensively is the key and therefore, I thought this was worth bringing up.

I don't know KG's numbers against top 5 defenses, but I imagine his argument would not be so much his production, but rather maybe a more complimentary offensive skillsets next to a better offensive player.

[MiltownHawkeye]

Why the hell are we using Team D-RTG and comparing from 20 years ago? (1st ranked defense this season was the 107.1 Lakers, in 2003 it was 94.1...). But this was always the predictable blowback from people who still put Garnett on a pedestal. Everything clearly in Giannis' favor at this point of their respective careers (nearly every pace adjusted box and advanced metric, awards/accolades, overall team success) ultimately gets refuted by the only two prime-KG, holy grail metrics (RAPM, on/off) that matter in this debate. Never mind that simple logic dictates that the worse your bench and supporting counterparts are, the better your "impact" numbers will naturally reflect.

Someone nailed it earlier in this thread, but Minnesota KG is constantly viewed as one of the best defensive anchors post-Russell, despite there being only sparse, circumstantial evidence (literally only two Top-10 and zero Top-5 defenses in 12 seasons) entirely reliant on sometimes noisy, isolated on-off/RPM data. We then use Boston KG as a form of confirmation bias ("See, KG was always an ATG defensive anchor), but yet we overlook the incredibly good supporting pieces (Thibodeau, Rondo, Pierce, Posey, Perkins, etc.) that helped achieved those results and penalize Giannis for having too good of a supporting cast, despite the fact that Giannis has anchored defenses (2018-20) at a comparable rate (+7.4 and +5.2 better than league average) as KG did even on those stacked Boston teams (+8.5 and +6). I'll reiterate that I won't argue with anyone saying they give the small but clear edge defensively to KG, but sorry, the offensive gap at this point is too massive when their defense is at least an honest debate and comparable. People can talk about "recency bias" all they want, but history will eventually reach the consensus that this past 3-year stretch by Giannis is one of the most un-impeachable multi-year peaks a superstar has ever had, and guys like KG just don't belong in that tier.

I'm not disagreeing with your post, but I do wonder if this 3 year stretch will be questioned by more skeptical minds. I would like to think we haven't seen the best of Giannis and that his performance in the Finals are things to come in terms of a truly great 3 year stretch.

However, I found this stat, and assuming the man calculated it correctly, I think it is worth sharing. I think it is a point that might be used to question the resilience of Giannis' offense just a bit. And like a post I made earlier on, there is reason to believe there is a gap between KG and Giannis on D based off the advanced numbers we have. We know Giannis is notably better on offense but does the gap close I'd we are talking about overall resiliency against top defenses?

Read on Twitter

?s=19

The last time he played a top 5 defense in DRtg was against Toronto in 2019. Seems like a garbage stat from a garbage account.

[Ron Swanson]

Why the hell are we using Team D-RTG and comparing from 20 years ago? (1st ranked defense this season was the 107.1 Lakers, in 2003 it was 94.1...). But this was always the predictable blowback from people who still put Garnett on a pedestal. Everything clearly in Giannis' favor at this point of their respective careers (nearly every pace adjusted box and advanced metric, awards/accolades, overall team success) ultimately gets refuted by the only two prime-KG, holy grail metrics (RAPM, on/off) that matter in this debate. Never mind that simple logic dictates that the worse your bench and supporting counterparts are, the better your "impact" numbers will naturally reflect.

Someone nailed it earlier in this thread, but Minnesota KG is constantly viewed as one of the best defensive anchors post-Russell, despite there being only sparse, circumstantial evidence (literally only two Top-10 and zero Top-5 defenses in 12 seasons) entirely reliant on sometimes noisy, isolated on-off/RPM data. We then use Boston KG as a form of confirmation bias ("See, KG was always an ATG defensive anchor), but yet we overlook the incredibly good supporting pieces (Thibodeau, Rondo, Pierce, Posey, Perkins, etc.) that helped achieved those results and penalize Giannis for having too good of a supporting cast, despite the fact that Giannis has anchored defenses (2018-20) at a comparable rate (+7.4 and +5.2 better than league average) as KG did even on those stacked Boston teams (+8.5 and +6). I'll reiterate that I won't argue with anyone saying they give the small but clear edge defensively to KG, but sorry, the offensive gap at this point is too massive when their defense is at least an honest debate and comparable. People can talk about "recency bias" all they want, but history will eventually reach the consensus that this past 3-year stretch by Giannis is one of the most un-impeachable multi-year peaks a superstar has ever had, and guys like KG just don't belong in that tier.

I'm not disagreeing with your post, but I do wonder if this 3 year stretch will be questioned by more skeptical minds. I would like to think we haven't seen the best of Giannis and that his performance in the Finals are things to come in terms of a truly great 3 year stretch.

However, I found this stat, and assuming the man calculated it correctly, I think it is worth sharing. I think it is a point that might be used to question the resilience of Giannis' offense just a bit.

Read on Twitter

?s=19

You might be right in that you'll have some contrarians (what superstar doesn't have those?), but I do find that tweet pretty hilarious considering that it:

A) Leaves out his 2018 playoffs vs. #1 ranked Boston defense where he put up 25/9/6/1/1 on 62% TS
B) He didn't "calculate" it correctly, and it's literally one playoff series in 3 years (Toronto). Switch the criteria to "Top-8" defenses and those numbers look like prime Lebron playoff numbers.

[sansterre]

I posted this in a different Giannis thread, but I'm posting it here because I believe it's fairly on point:

Giannis' scoring is *not* particularly resilient. Here are the differences between his regular season scoring (volume measured by ShotShare% and efficiency measured by TS% adjusted for opposition):

2019: +0.3% / -6.56%
2020: -2.2% / -0.24%
2021: +0.0% / -3.00%

I can say with some authority that a 3% drop in True Shooting (adjusted for opposition) is unusually large. Of the 72 players I've run so far, only three others averaged so big a drop over 1500+ postseason minutes (Clifford Robinson, DeMar DeRozan and Peja Stojakovic). It is normal for 30% ShotShare guys to see a drop in their numbers, but Giannis' is about as big as I've seen so far (though Dame is comparable).

To be clear, I am not trying to assert that playoff Giannis is a bad scorer. He's an extremely good scorer. But he's not as good as he is in the regular season, at least not in any way measured by volume and by efficiency that I can see. For all I know he became Resilient Man (TM) after the NBA Finals and going forward his numbers will hold up much better in the postseason. But there's no evidence for that to date.

* A quiet point about Giannis' postseasons is that the defenses he's faced haven't actually been very good in the TS% allowed department. In terms of regular season TS% allowed (adjusted for Giannis' TSA against) his opponents in the last three years have been (negative is good, meaning better than league average):

2019: -0.84%
2020: -0.06%
2021: -0.40%

Those aren't awful (they're clearly above average) but as playoff runs go, it's on the low end of defensive opposition. Compare these to Kobe from 2008 to 2010:

2008: -1.18%
2009: -1.77%
2010: -0.89%

All I'm saying is that when you're looking at Giannis' postseason efficiency, it would be easy to give his opposing defenses more credit than they merited.

[LukaTheGOAT]

Why the hell are we using Team D-RTG and comparing from 20 years ago? (1st ranked defense this season was the 107.1 Lakers, in 2003 it was 94.1...). But this was always the predictable blowback from people who still put Garnett on a pedestal. Everything clearly in Giannis' favor at this point of their respective careers (nearly every pace adjusted box and advanced metric, awards/accolades, overall team success) ultimately gets refuted by the only two prime-KG, holy grail metrics (RAPM, on/off) that matter in this debate. Never mind that simple logic dictates that the worse your bench and supporting counterparts are, the better your "impact" numbers will naturally reflect.

Someone nailed it earlier in this thread, but Minnesota KG is constantly viewed as one of the best defensive anchors post-Russell, despite there being only sparse, circumstantial evidence (literally only two Top-10 and zero Top-5 defenses in 12 seasons) entirely reliant on sometimes noisy, isolated on-off/RPM data. We then use Boston KG as a form of confirmation bias ("See, KG was always an ATG defensive anchor), but yet we overlook the incredibly good supporting pieces (Thibodeau, Rondo, Pierce, Posey, Perkins, etc.) that helped achieved those results and penalize Giannis for having too good of a supporting cast, despite the fact that Giannis has anchored defenses (2018-20) at a comparable rate (+7.4 and +5.2 better than league average) as KG did even on those stacked Boston teams (+8.5 and +6). I'll reiterate that I won't argue with anyone saying they give the small but clear edge defensively to KG, but sorry, the offensive gap at this point is too massive when their defense is at least an honest debate and comparable. People can talk about "recency bias" all they want, but history will eventually reach the consensus that this past 3-year stretch by Giannis is one of the most un-impeachable multi-year peaks a superstar has ever had, and guys like KG just don't belong in that tier.

I'm not disagreeing with your post, but I do wonder if this 3 year stretch will be questioned by more skeptical minds. I would like to think we haven't seen the best of Giannis and that his performance in the Finals are things to come in terms of a truly great 3 year stretch.

However, I found this stat, and assuming the man calculated it correctly, I think it is worth sharing. I think it is a point that might be used to question the resilience of Giannis' offense just a bit.

Read on Twitter

?s=19

You might be right in that you'll have some contrarians (what superstar doesn't have those?), but I do find that tweet pretty hilarious considering that it:

A) Leaves out his 2018 playoffs vs. #1 ranked Boston defense where he put up 25/9/6/1/1 on 62% TS
B) He didn't "calculate" it correctly, and it's literally one playoff series in 3 years (Toronto). Switch the criteria to "Top-8" defenses and those numbers look like prime Lebron playoff numbers.

Thank you for the heads up.

[dygaction]

He played with 27/15,7/5,2 against the LA(104,5 Drtg), in the 2003 Playoffs. And the very next year, played with 23,7/13,5/4,5 against the LA(101,5 Drtg) in the 2004 WCF. Giannis faced in order 114,113 and 111,5 Drtg post first round in the 2021 Playoffs. Even, when you adjust poss defence it's almost over than 15 Offensive Rating difference between the two had faced. Of course, KG has higher load, but Giannis was more efficient, to be fair. But it also not a huge gap, before the finals he had average rTS against the 112 Drtg competition.

You got to use regular seasons to have enough statistics to compare their MVP seasons.
Using two Lakers series from two different years where KG lost both to compare with Giannis title run do not sound fair. Just use one series, Dirk's 33.3/15.7 over KG in a 3:0 sweep would be game over between the discussion of these two.
Not one series in KG's career came close to Giannis' finals performance 35.2/13.2/5.0a/.658TS% facing 111.5 Drtg Suns.

That's good team Defensive Rating?

Garnett's TWolves lost to the Lakers in 2003 and they had 104.7 (19th of 29). Lost to them in 2004 and they had 101.3 (8th of 29).

Did not say Suns 111.5 DRtg was good… Listed it as a piece of info so we can compare more objectively.

[Texas Chuck]

I'm sorry but posting a cherry-picked stat from a twitter account literally called exposingGiannis should not be seen as any kind of compelling evidence.

[LukaTheGOAT]

I'm sorry but posting a cherry-picked stat from a twitter account literally called exposingGiannis should not be seen as any kind of compelling evidence.

I did say that I did not calculate it myself. While the account is liable to have bias, if the stat was calculated correctly and had a decent sample, it would be noteworthy.

Plenty of people over the years here have brought up stats against certain levels of defense. Seeing how well Giannis does against top defenses is not cherry picked considering we are looking to estimate his resiliency.

[Colbinii]

I posted this in a different Giannis thread, but I'm posting it here because I believe it's fairly on point:

Giannis' scoring is *not* particularly resilient. Here are the differences between his regular season scoring (volume measured by ShotShare% and efficiency measured by TS% adjusted for opposition):

2019: +0.3% / -6.56%
2020: -2.2% / -0.24%
2021: +0.0% / -3.00%

I can say with some authority that a 3% drop in True Shooting (adjusted for opposition) is unusually large. Of the 72 players I've run so far, only three others averaged so big a drop over 1500+ postseason minutes (Clifford Robinson, DeMar DeRozan and Peja Stojakovic). It is normal for 30% ShotShare guys to see a drop in their numbers, but Giannis' is about as big as I've seen so far (though Dame is comparable).

To be clear, I am not trying to assert that playoff Giannis is a bad scorer. He's an extremely good scorer. But he's not as good as he is in the regular season, at least not in any way measured by volume and by efficiency that I can see. For all I know he became Resilient Man (TM) after the NBA Finals and going forward his numbers will hold up much better in the postseason. But there's no evidence for that to date.

* A quiet point about Giannis' postseasons is that the defenses he's faced haven't actually been very good in the TS% allowed department. In terms of regular season TS% allowed (adjusted for Giannis' TSA against) his opponents in the last three years have been (negative is good, meaning better than league average):

2019: -0.84%
2020: -0.06%
2021: -0.40%

Those aren't awful (they're clearly above average) but as playoff runs go, it's on the low end of defensive opposition. Compare these to Kobe from 2008 to 2010:

2008: -1.18%
2009: -1.77%
2010: -0.89%

All I'm saying is that when you're looking at Giannis' postseason efficiency, it would be easy to give his opposing defenses more credit than they merited.

It is also possible to cite weaknesses of Giannis and for him to also be great.

Unfortunately you have people calling different groups as "Putting Garnett on a pedistal" instead of engaging in high-level conversation, though looking at who it comes from is no surprise given some of us only come off our high horses to raise the flags of our opinions.

edit: I dont see this playoff run as significantly or better than Giannis' previous runs. He never faced a team like 2019 Toronto (Or 2019 Philly had they won). It was a great run and he had a bit more help than the Eric Bledsoe Milwaukee Bucks and he made some spectacular players he didn't before.

I would peg Giannis around top 20 Peak of all-time, going from about 17 or 18 to 25 or 26. Great player, only going to continue to improve but didn't have the impact of the top 10-15 peaks for me (LeBron, Jordan, Russell, Duncan, Garnett, Kareem, Shaq, Hakeem, Wilt, Magic, Bird, Curry, Walton, Erving).

[Texas Chuck]

I'm sorry but posting a cherry-picked stat from a twitter account literally called exposingGiannis should not be seen as any kind of compelling evidence.

I did say that I did not calculate it myself. While the account is liable to have bias, if the stat was calculated correctly and had a decent sample, it would be noteworthy.

Plenty of people over the years here have brought up stats against certain levels of defense. Seeing how well Giannis does against top defenses is not cherry picked considering we are looking to estimate his resiliency.

Okay but it doesn't have a valid sample as it was clearly cherry-picked as already established earlier itt. It's bad data and should not be used and the fact that its coming from an account with an obvious agenda should have made that clear to you immediately.

[LukaTheGOAT]

I'm sorry but posting a cherry-picked stat from a twitter account literally called exposingGiannis should not be seen as any kind of compelling evidence.

I did say that I did not calculate it myself. While the account is liable to have bias, if the stat was calculated correctly and had a decent sample, it would be noteworthy.

Plenty of people over the years here have brought up stats against certain levels of defense. Seeing how well Giannis does against top defenses is not cherry picked considering we are looking to estimate his resiliency.

Okay but it doesn't have a valid sample as it was clearly cherry-picked as already established earlier itt. It's bad data and should not be used and the fact that its coming from an account with an obvious agenda should have made that clear to you immediately.

This doesn't disprove a single thing I pointed out whatsoever with regards to the fact that someone who can be biased, can still provide statistical information, and also be a hint into Giannis having not proved resilience against tougher defenses but okay...

[drza]

Again, with respect, I think the tenor of most of the arguments in this thread is incorrect. I don't think this comp is based on whether Giannis thus far is some sort of fluke or not...he's not. He's what he showed this year, and likely more. I expect that in three years we'll see that clearly. Trying to build an argument around weakening Giannis isn't satisfying, and misses the point.

The question is whether Giannis vs peak KG is a legit discussion. I think it is, because Giannis is good enough to be legitimately discussed against anyone. I think it's fair to compare him to the Kareem that led the Bucks to their last championship, to Hakeem, to Shaq, to Duncan...whoever. Those are legit discussions to have.

Now, if the question is whether I think 2021 Giannis was as good as peak KG, the answer is 'no'. There's an over-reliance in this thread (and in general) on scoring volume and efficiency in evaluation purposes. It's just not that great of a way to estimate a player's offensive impact. And legit, in the databall era, we've got many way better ways to do it.

If we look at skillsets, for example. Giannis on offense is a lot like Deontay Wilder, the boxer...he's got a DOMINANT knockout game, and he's talented enough in other areas that it's very difficult for the opponent to stop him from setting up that big punch and ending the fight. But against highly skilled opponents that can work around that huge punch, Giannis can have difficulty. In this analogy, KG may be more like what we've seen from Tyson Fury. He's a big guy with the skills of a smaller player, that still knows how to use his own physical gifts to make himself into a mismatch for pretty much any opponent.

Leaving that metaphor aside, the biggest difference between the 2021 Bucks and the 2019/2020 versions were 1) Giannis really did play better in big moments, but just as importantly 2) the supporting cast was improved in a very specific way and have to acknowledge 3) they didn't face an opponent fully capable of implementing the type of defense that Giannis has had trouble with. The Bucks' strategy in the Giannis era has been to rely on his wrecking-ball scoring ability at the rim, and even if the opponent builds a wall to stop him, that just means that there should be open looks for his teammates. The entire Bucks starting 5 and their main contributors off the bench are all capable of knocking down the 3-pointer consistently, so if Giannis collapses the defense he can either score at high efficiency or one of the other shooters should get a good look. This provides for a strong overall offense.

As we've seen the last few playoffs, including this one, that strategy doesn't always work against elite teams. But more than that, utilizing Giannis in this way doesn't optimize his teammates for success. Players with the ability to create looks for themselves and others, like Holiday and Middleton, aren't always optimized as spot-up shooters...even when Giannis can draw enough attention to get them open looks. Both Holiday and Middleton seem to play better, more consistently, when they can have the ball in their hands for extended stretches. Giannis' approach collapses defenses, but unlike Shaq, he needs to attack off the face-up dribble and without a lot of back-to-the-basket or ISO skills...thus, Giannis needs to have the ball in his own hands to have his effect. I don't think it's a coincidence that Holiday, for example, averaged:

23.7 PPG (51.8% FG) in his last playoffs run next to Anthony Davis,
26.0 PPG (46.5% FG) in the two games he played this postseason when Giannis sat, but only
16.5 PPG (39.9% FG) in the other 21 playoffs games this season next to Giannis

It's not that this was the wrong style of play for the Bucks...they actually won the chip, after all. But I'd say it wasn't the way to maximize Holiday (or, necessarily, the other Bucks players) to play their best.

Garnett, on the other hand, would've died and gone to heaven to be able to play on this Bucks team. Picture the KG from 2002-03, that led the Timberwolves in every major category on their way to 51 wins. He was the third-highest offensive impact player in the NBA, according to RAPM, but he also had the skillset to maintain that impact while allowing teammates to maximize. He could operate off the face-up on ball, but could also post up all over the court and run the offense from that office. He was an excellent pick-setter, still had peak athleticism which would make him an elite roll-man/finisher with a good, attacking point guard but was also an elite jump-shooter which creates spacing for everyone else. Playing with that KG, this year's Bucks offense would have been even more lethal. Holiday could've played to his capacity as a team offense creator, Middleton could have played to his capacity, Brook Lopez would've had room to roam in the middle or kick to the perimeter as desired, etc. And KG's versatility as a scorer, offensive hub and dirty-work guy would've allowed the Bucks' offense to run at its peak. I'd contend it'd have been even stronger, as a unit, than what we saw this season.

I won't go through the same exercise defensively, but I believe he'd have been an even larger defensive upgrade than an offensive one.

See, people get tired of hearing about KG's elite impact stats over close to two decades, across a vast variety of different circumstances. But, you also know those numbers exist as a record of what happened. And we also have reams of scouting-based data from various sources to support statements like "KG was the best passing big man of his era", "KG was the best big man offense initiator/creator of his era", "KG was an elite scorer in the post", "KG was one of the best at drawing double teams in his era", "KG was one of the best big man shooters of all-time", etc. You don't have to just rely on +/- data to see KG's impact and level...but that data does exist, to further solidify what other methods should've already gotten across.

So, yes. It's legit to discuss Giannis vs KG. Or anyone else. But once you have that discussion, to me it's pretty clear that as great as Giannis is, he's still got quite aways to go to catch up to (one of) his mentor(s)...